the vote on moving ahead with the nomination is expected to be close to live coverage of the senate now here on c-span2. the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. barry black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. eternal god, how great you are! you are clothed with majesty and glory, riding on the wings of the wind. from the rising of the sun to its setting, we lift our hearts in gratitude, for you have done marvelously. continue to sustain

our senators with your constant love and faithfulness, answering them when they call to you in prayer. help them to make every effort to do your will on earth, giving you their doubts and fears as they trust you to order their steps. may they realize that weakness provides an opportunity for your strength to be revealed. we pray in your great name. amen. the presiding officer: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to the flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands,

one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the presiding officer: the clerk will read a communication to the senate. the clerk: washington, d.c., october 29, 2013. to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable edward j. markey, a senator from the commonwealth of massachusetts, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: patrick j. leahy, president pro tempore. mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: following leader remarks -- following leader remarks, the republican leader or his designee will move to proceed to s.j. res. 26, a joint resolution of disapproval on the debt ceiling. the time until 12:30 will be equally divided, the senate

will resettest is from 1:30 to 2:15 for our weekly business meeting of each caucus. at 2:15 senators should expected two roll call votes. first on the motion to proceed to s.j. res. 26 and second a cloture vote on the nomination of richard f. griffin to be national counsel, national labor relations board. this is a term for four years. mr. president, i'm told s. 1592 is at the desk and due for a second reading. the presiding officer: the clerk will read the title of the bill for the second time. the clerk: s. 1592 a bill to provide for a delay of the individual mandate under the patient protection and affordable care act until the american health benefit exchanges are functioning properly. mr. reid: i would object to any further proceedings on this legislation the president. the presiding officer: objection having been heard, the bill will be placed upon the calendar number. mr. reid: today finances will consider a motion to proceed to

a resolution of disapproval filed by the republican leader which would cause the country to default on its debts for the first time in history. democrats will oppose this motion to vote for preserve the full faith and credit of our great country. by remind my republican friends two weeks ago every democrat and 27 republicans in the senate as well as 285 members of the house of representatives already voted to do the right thing and pay the nation's debts. so i look forward to quickly dispensing with this republican resolution which would risk america's economic security as well as a global depression. this vote will take place this afternoon after our weekly business meetings. mr. president, i want to spend a little bit of time talking about nominations. directly after the vote on the default legislation, the vote to break a filibuster of president obama's nomination of richard griffin to search as national counsel on the national labor relations board.

mr. president, there has already been 67 of president obama's nominations filibustered. mr. president, let's just vote on these nominations. and i can't imagine why it would be the a good foing they are this country and the senate to not allow us to go forward on this nomination. if you don't like him, vote against him but don't stop the debate from going forward. if cloture is invoked, there will be 80 hours of debate under the new you new rules we've established in the senate. we will have four hours, the minority will have four hours. so i think that would be the appropriate thing to do. mr. president, few americans are aware of the job that the national labor relations board does. but it looks out for the rights of millions of u.s. workers every day, democrat workers, independents, tea party workers

regardless of whether they're in a union or not. mr. griffin has extensive experience in employment law. he's highly respected by his fellow labor lawyers on both the union and business sides. as general counsel for the nlrb he will safeguard fair compensation and working conditions for all american workers. this week the senate will also vote on a number of other crucial executive nominations. some of whom have been stalled for more than a year. the senate will consider the nomination of katherine archuleta to serve as director of the office of personnel management. that is an extremely important position. she started her career in public service as an elementty tri schoolteacher. she will be the agency's first hispanic director. this is what she said -- and i quote -- "you do it as public service because have you a deep

passion for public good and civic engagement. that's her quote. she's working in both the transportation and energy departments under president clinton, she served as chief of staff to tib the the labor secretary hilda solis for three years. she is emintentsly qualified yet ms. arch let sea the first o.p.m. director to be filibustered in the history of this agency. this week the senate sentence tns will car the stalled nomination of alan astefs -- estevez to be undersecretary of defense. this man's nomination has been stalled for 402 days. he will be responsible for $170 billion logistics budget, $170 billion. that's a year. this budget supports our men and women in uniform as well as

millions of machines that make them and take them where they want to go. he specialized in military logistics for more than ten years and it's unfortunate that republicans will hold up confirmation of such a crucial defense department nomination. now, i'm told most of it's held up for an unrelated matter. dealing with some other issue. just wrong. if you don't like this guy, stand up and say why you don't like him and vote against him. but don't stop us from moving forward on the nomination. now, most of the opposition to this man has been held up for 200 days is i'm told by the senior senator from texas, the junior senator from texas has placed a hold on another nomination. a man named tom wheeler to be democratic member of the federal communications commission. the f.c.c., very important

agency. in nngs to writing two books mr. wheeler has founded important companies. he's cofounded the largest targeted news service and developed the telecommunications policy. president obama nominated tom wheeler as well as republican michael o'reilly to fill two vacant seats on the f.c.c. so what's stopping us from filling these vacancies with a bipartisan pair of nominees? listen to this. the senator from texas stalled the nomination because he owe boazs legislation proposed by democrats in congress that would require shadowy groups that spend millions on political advertising to disclose their donors. this next one is really a doozie , mr. president. the united states secretary of finance, treasury, i'm sorry,

other countries it's called secretary of -- or minister of finance. extremely important job. this man is qualified. he's run the office of management and budget, he's been the present chief of staff, he's now secretary of treasury and what a fine, fine man jack lew. jack lew even though he is the secretary of treasury of this great country, he can't go to meetings that other finance ministers from around the world can go. why? because republicans are holding up his nomination to all these important bank boards. finance boards. international monetary fund. he's supposed to be there, kent go. -- he can't go. he's a talented and dedicated public servant. he's already been confirmed by the senate. every treasury secretary serves as a united states representative on bank boards

and offers america's position on global financial matters. that's his job. kent do that because -- he can't do that because of what i've just said. it's an embarrassment we haven't acted swiftly to confirm him in this role. to think we have to file cloture on this. yet the junior senator from kentucky has subjected to this partisan wrangling and others have joined with him as he threatens to do with janet yellin to serve as chairman of the federal reserve. the presiding officer and others who serve in this body have served in the house of representatives with a fine public servant by the name of mel watt. i got to know mel watt when he was chairman of the black congressional caucus. we come over and visit with me every month or so. a fine man. he's represented north carolina's 12th congressional district since 1993. and as a senior member of the

house finances service me committee he understands the mistakes that led to the housing crisis. he also has proposed legislation to contract down on the worst abuses in mortgage lending and helped pass the dodd-frank bill to prevent predatory lending. he's qualified to help struggling homeowners to recover from the worst economic downturn in generations and my republican colleagues should give him the up-or-down vote he deserves, not filibuster him. i know some republicans don't like dodd-frank. obviously, they didn't mind the abuses that led to the crashing of wall street. but he shouldn't be punished for that. so, mr. president, the time when america faces difficult times at homes it's crucial the senate confirm these talented and dedicated individuals to serve in the executive branch of government. let us vote on these

nominations. they shouldn't have in these normally easy confirmable positions a filibuster. not long ago i can remember republicans in this body were concerned because they couldn't get the votes they wanted on their nominees for president bush. they spr have spread this record clear that -- that it's the right of the president to choose the players on his team. we should return to that customary, remove that, and assure highly qualified nominees receive fair and speedy consideration they deserve.

mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: the republican leader. mr. mcconnell: i think at this point senators from both parties can agree healthcare.gov is a rolling disaster. every day seems to bring more, newer, comic cament lit. we hear things like people being told their wife is almost really their daughter or they have multiple spouses or they're unable to apply due to current incarceration. insurpriseingly, just 12% of americans think the rollout has gone well. that's less than 14% of americans who believe in big foot. those who succeeded in actually enrolling in a plan are vastly

outnumbered by those who have actually lost their plans. and the real tragedy here is that many who have succeeded are finding out the product is actually worse than the web site. i mean the only thing the web site seems to be good at right now is creating a punch line for late-night comedians. it's almost like americans are being forced to live through a real live "saturday night live" sketch, and if you caught last week's opener, it is harder to tell the obamacare headlines from the obamacare punch lines these days. paper applications, 800 numbers, applying by fax; obamacare appears to be leading us boldly, boldly into the 1980's. remember before this thing launched, the administration swore up and down that obamacare was ready to go. democratic leaders in congress told americans that the law's

implementation was fabulous, that obamacare was wonderful. the president reassured everyone that it was working the way it was supposed to. and, of course, washington democrats bragged about their fancy, new web site, the web site that cost taxpayers $100 million, $200 million, $300 million? well, no one's quite sure. that's just one of the unanswered questions we hope they'll clarify soon. now, to be fakers the president likes -- to be fair, the president likes to say obamacare is about more than just a web site. he's right. that is why fixing a web site won't solve the larger problem here. the larger problem is obamacare itself. the larger problem is what the few people who actually have signed up for coverage have discovered about this law. the larger problem is how obamacare is hurting people out

there. it's about college graduates and middle-class families getting hit with massive premium increases they can't afford. it's about workers seeing their hours cut and their paychecks shrink because of this law. it's about millions of americans who will lose their current health coverage because of obamacare despite, despite the president's promises. according to news reports, the obama administration knew for at least three years that millions, millions of americans would not be taoeubl keep their health -- able to keep their health coverage. the president's press secretary basically admitted that americans would lose coverage too. this is the same president who said -- and i quote -- "if you like your health care plan, you'll be able to keep your health care plan. period. no one will take it away. no matter what." that is what the president said. this is one of the many reasons americans feel betrayed.

one woman quoted in "the los angeles times" put it this way -- this is what she said -- "all we've been hearing for the last three years is if you like your policy, you can keep it. i'm infuriated because i was lied to." here's how one north carolinian put it to nbc news: "everybody's worried about whether the web site works or not, but that's fixable. that's just the tip of the iceberg. this stuff isn't fixable." that was after he lost a $228 a month plan and was faced with a choice of taking a comparable plan for $1,208. $1,208 instead of $228 a month. the best option he could find on the skpaepbgz -- exchanges was one for $948 a month. "i'm thinking we ought to pay the fine and get insurance when we're sick after looking at all

that." americans around the country are beginning to experience the cost of obamacare firsthand, and they're realizing they are the ones stuck with the bill. it's not fair. it's not right. and republicans are going to keep fighting to get our constituents relief from this partisan law. of course the most logical course would be to simply stop this train wreck and start over. but washington democrats still appear more interested in protecting the president's namesake, his legacy than protecting their constituents from this law. i hope that will change because we can't move forward without democrats. we've seen some signs that at least some democrats are coming around slowly, slowly, much more slowly than we would like, and i'm happy to engage in discussions to see where we might find common ground. hopefully we'll eventually get to the increasingly obvious end game here -- repeal, followed by true bipartisan health care

reform. so look, it may be universally accepted that healthcare.gov is a disaster, but as the president reminds us, that disaster does not exist in a vacuum. the failure of the obamacare web site is emblematic of the larger failure of obamacare itself and of the kind of problems we can expect if washington democrats continue their stubborn defense of this partisan law. now, mr. president, on another matter, politicians regularly

come to washington promising fiscal responsibility, but too often they can't agree to cut spending when it counts. that's why the budget control act is such a big deal. since congress passed the b.c.a. with overwhelming bipartisan majorities in 2011, washington has actually, actually reduced the level of government spending for two years running. that's the first time this has happened since the korean war. the b.c.a. savings are such a big deal in fact that the president campaigned on it endlessly in 2012. he bragged about the bipartisan cuts in colorado and in iowa. he trumpeted the reductions from coast to coast, telling audiences from california to baltimore that he -- quote -- "signed $2 trillion of spending cuts into law." as our democratic friends like to say these days, elections

matter, and the president explicitly, explicitly staked his reelection on the back of these bipartisan spending cuts. i mean, just look at the exit polls from november. a majority of americans said that the government was doing too much. about two-thirds said raising taxes to cut the deficit was a nonstarter. and compared to obamacare, which more voters actually said they wanted to repeal, these levels of support are striking. so if our friends on the other side want to keep trying to claim an electoral mandate for maintaining obamacare contradicted by the facts as that phaoeurbgs while using their own logic we had to call the mandate for reducing the size of government a super mandate. that's why their new plan to undo the cuts the president campaigned on and increase the debt is so outrageous. we hear that the senior senator from new york will soon announce a proposal to give the

permanent -- give the president permanent power to borrow more. in other words, he wants to extend the debt ceiling permanently by going around congress. let me repeat that. the so-called schumer-obama plan is a plan to permanently hand the president a credit card without spending limits and without lifting a finger to address the national debt. truly outrageous, especially when you consider that our debt is now $17 trillion, which makes us look a lot like a european country. we have to get our debt under control before we move any further down the road to greece or spain. and time is not on our side. now i hear the senator from new york is going to try and sell his proposal as a -- quote, unquote -- mcconnell plan. i appreciate the attempt at a p.r. gimmick here, but there are two huge differences between the schumer-obama plan and what i proposed in the past. first, schumer-obama would raise

the debt ceiling permanently. i reject that idea entirely. and second, unlike schumer-obama i believe that increases in the debt ceiling should be accompanied by reforms. that's just what we did in 2011. when congress raised the debt ceiling in return for enacting $2 trillion in bipartisan spending control. the spending control the president campaigned on last year endlessly. that's the real mcconnell plan, and if the senator from new york is interested in working with me to enact another $2 trillion in bipartisan cuts, then let's get down to brass tacks. the american would love to see us working in a bipartisan way to help them. but if he insists on pushing the schumer-obama plan, he's not going to find any dance partners on this side of the aisle. because handing the president a permanent blank check increasing the size of government and trying to overturn the most significant bipartisan

accomplishment of the obama years, well, that's just a nonstarter. our debt is a serious problem. i know kentuckians think so, like americans all across the country, they understand it's completely unsustainable over the long run and they understand it's standing in the way of jobs and economic growth today. so let's shelf the gimmicks and the blank checks and get to work on bipartisan plans to get spending under control. that's what our constituents expect. finally, mr. president, i move to proceed to s.j. res. 26. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the motion to proceed. the clerk: the senator from kentucky, mr. mcconnell, moves to proceed to calendar number 223, s.j. res., relating to the disapproval of the president's exercise of authority to suspend the debt limit as submitted under section 1002-b of the continuing appropriations act 2014 on october 17, 2013.

the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. under the previous order, the time until 12:30 p.m. will be equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees. mr. hatch: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from utah. mr. hatch: before i make my remarks, i understand the distinguished senator from tennessee has been waiting to make some remarks himself. i ask unanimous consent that he go first, and then if senator baucus is here, he go second, i go third. but if senator baucus is not here, i'll go second then. the presiding officer: without objection, the gentleman from tennessee is recognized. mr. alexander: mr. president, i thank the senator from utah. if through the chair i might --

if that suits his convenience, i appreciate that courtesy very much. and i shouldn't take more than about eight or ten minutes in my remarks. mr. president, the president should ask the secretary of health and human services kathleen sebelius to resign her position because of the disastrous rollout of obamacare. taxpayers have spent $400 million to create exchanges, but after three and one half years still don't work. as a result, the white house had to announce last night that the key enforcement mechanism to their individual mandate, a $95 fine that increases every year, will be waived until the end of march of next year. that's fine for those currently without insurance. but for the millions being forced into the exchanges and losing their current insurance, there's no relief. just higher prices. a likely lapse in insurance coverage. a broken web site. and broken promises. we already know of 1.5 million

americans are losing their policies because starting january 1, many insurance policies that they now have will not be legal under obamacare and because the exchange will not be working, they won't be able to choose another policy. this chart gives an example of what's going on. just in three states: california, florida and new jersey, there are 1.4 million insurance policies that won't be valid after january 1 because they're not legal under obamacare. compare that number, 1.4 million, to the number of americans in those three states who have reportedly applied on the web site for insurance. so 7% or 8% of the people who will lose their current policy have applied for a different policy. that's what's really going on across this country in families as people worry about health

care. these are policies in the individual market. there are 19 million americans in the individual market. we also heard on nbc news over the last couple of days that the obama administration knew -- knew -- that 47% to 60% of the policies in the individual market wouldn't be legally offered under obamacare. yet still said to people if you like your insurance, you can keep it. mr. president, at some point there has to be accountability. expecting this secretary to be able to fix what she hasn't been able to fix during the last three and a half years is unrealistic. it's throwing good money after bad. it's time for her to resign, someone else to take charge. no private-sector chief executive would escape accountability after such a poor performance. and the principle of accountability is not and should not be foreign to the public sector.

admiral rickover father of the nuclear navy, told his subway captains they were not only accountable fob their ships but accountable for the nuclear reactors on their ships. if anything went wrong, the admiral said your career in the navy is over. as a result of that dose of accountability, since the 1950's there never been a death as a result of a problem with the naval submarine reactor. americans deserve that kind of accountability this the implementation of the new health care law. instead, the secretary appears not even to have told the president about known problems with the obamacare web site in the months and days leading up to the launch. despite repeated requests she's refused to tell congress or the public the reasons the obamacare web site continues to fail while insisting on more time and an undisclosed amount of money to fix it. before the internet, r.c.a.

knew how many records elvis was selling every day, fooferred now -- ford knew how many cars they were selling, mcdonald's could tell how many hamburgers it sold each day yet here we are in the advanced stage of the internet age and under secretary sebelius' leadership the obama administration will not tell us how many americans have tried to sign up for obamacare or how many have actually signed up for obamacare or what level of insurance they've purchased or in what zip code they live. not only can they not tell us, they've done their best to keep us from finding out. with wicki leaks and edward snowden spilling our beans every day what's happening on the exchanges is the best-kept secret in washington, d.c. the national security agency could learn something from secretary sebelius. today i will ask consent to approve a six-page bill i

introduced yesterday to require the the administration to answer these questions every week. secretary sebelius is not responsible for enacting obamacare, but she has been responsible for three and a half years for implementing it. now many americans have only a few weeks to purchase new insurance or be without health insurance. to expect the secretary to correct in a few weeks what she's not been able to do in three and a half years is unrealistic. mr. president, it's time for the president to ask the secretary of health and human services to resign. i thank the president and i yield the floor. mr. hatch: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from utah. mr. hatch: during debate over debt limit increase in 2009 --

2006, then-senator obama stated that -- quote -- "the fact that we are here today to debate raising america's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure"-- unquote. leadership then-senator obama said, -- quote -- "means the buck stops here. instead, washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. america has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. americans deserve better"-- unquote. that was former senator barack obama. mr. president, at that time our gross debt was $8.3 trillion. it is now well above twice that, currently standing at $17.1 trillion which is over 100% of the size of our economy. during that same 2006 debt limit debate, then-senator biden said

-- quote -- "my vote against the debt limit increase cannot change the fact that we have incurred this debt already and will no doubt incur more. it is a statement that i refuse to be associated with the policies that brought us to this point"-- unquote. that was then-senator biden. mr. president, things have certainly changed since 2006. now president obama and vice president joe biden preside over an administration that tells us that raising the debt limit is merely a matter of paying our bills and is a a reflection of decisions made in congress. yet while it is ostensibly true congress has the power to raise the debt limit, it is not true that congress makes spending decisions. unilaterally. with no role being played by the executive branch. no amount of spending can be

enacted without the president signing it into law. in addition, the president submits a budget every year. the white house also issues policy statements and veto threats on spending bills on a more or less frequent basis. and, of course, every administration works with coagenda which inherently inclus setting priorities in federal spending. so in short, the commonly repeated notion that questions surrounding spending and the debt limit are congress' and congress' alone, to answer, is simply an attempt by this administration to avoid accountability on these issues. ultimately regardless of what president obama and those in his administration are saying now, both congress and the executive branch are to blame for our current predicament. let's take a look at that predicament for a moment, mr. president, and the president has exercised his

authority to suspend the debt limit under the continuing appropriations act of 2014, which he signed into law on october 17. on october 16, public debt subject to the limit was around $16.7 trillion. on october 17, the very next day, public debt subject to the limit was over $17 trillion. in one day, treasury increased the debt subject to the limit by over $328 billion. mr. president, let me repeat that. the debt increased by over $328 billion in a single day. that brings the increase in total public debt this administration to more than $6.4 trillion an amount that is by all accounts unprecedented. echoing earlier sentiments of then-senator biden, i refuse to be associated with the policies that brought us to this point.

the debt limit debate provides us with an opportunity to reexamine our nation's fiscal course and take steps to correct it. sadly, we have a president who appears unwilling to have that conversation. instead, he apparently wants to press forward full steam ahead on an already unsustainable course saddling future generations with unheard of debts and broken entitlement payments in the process. or should i say promises in the process. unfortunately, as the congressional budget office has made clear, over the course of president obama's administration the government has recorded the largest budget deficits relative to the size of the economy since 1946. causing our debt to soar as we all know. federal debt as a percent of the economy's oonl output is higher than at any point in u.s. history except for a brief

period around world war ii. c.b.o. makes three other things equally clear. one, our debt path is unsustainable. threatening our economy and putting us at risk of a fiscal crisis. two, the root of our fiscal problem is federal spending, not a lack of revenue, and three, the main source of our spending problem is our unsustainable entitlement programs. that being the case, mr. president, any serious talk about raising the debt limit must include a real, concrete discussion about entitlement reform. as every credible analyst will tell you we need to face the fiscal facts and enact serious sphructdural reforms to our entitlement programs. so far, president obama has been unwilling to even engage in this discussion. these days, every fiscal

discussion with the white house begins and ends with demands for additional tax hikes to fuel even more spending. and i guarantee it will be spending, it won't be paying down the national debt or paying down what we owe. it will be to spend more. of course, the president will occasionally resurrect officers he's -- offers he's made in the past in past failed fiscal negotiations to entertainment small changes, including movement to a different price index for cost of living adjustments. but at the same time the president and his administration have made clear that even those small entitlement changes will only be on the table if tax hikes are delivered first. that is the president's precondition for even entertaining tax reform or entitlement reform even on the heels of more than $630 billion tax hike at the beginning of

this year and another $1 trillion in revenue delivered courtesy of obamacare. mr. president, entitlement reform is not an option, it's a necessity. structural reforms should not hinge on another tax-and-spend operation. structural reforms to social security should not be held hostage to another tax hike. earlier this year i personally presented to the president in detail and in writing -- i'll emphasize personally gave him this -- five reform proposals relating to medicare and medicaid that have received bipartisan support, democrat and republican support in the past. i asked him to consider the proposals and have since asked members of the administration to likewise give the proposals consideration. and, by the way, when we had our supper down at the white house and the family dining room i brought it up again.

by the way, i've brought it up with the secretary of treasury over and over. i did not wait until an impending debt limit debate. rather, i put my proposals forward in good faith in a good-faith effort to begin timely discussions. unfortunately, thus far i've not received even the slightest response and the clock on medicare and medicaid keeps ticking and both of them are running more and more deficits as we speak. the situation with -- and, by the way, the five points were bipartisan. they were bipartisan matters that both democrats and republicans supported. the situation with social security isn't much better. the trustees of the trust funds embedded in the social security system including top administration officials such as the treasury secretary have in no uncertain terms urged

congress to act quickly on reforming the retirement and the disability insurance programs to move them towards sustainability. quite simply, it would be folly to approve of jet another debt limit increase without also working to address these problems which are the main drivers of our debts and of our deficits. therefore i disapprove of the president's exercise of an authority to suspend the debt limit. and i urge all of my colleagues to similarly disapprove. mr. president, the recent debt limit impasse and the impasse of 2011 also provided a good deal of information about lack of accountability of the treasury department and of our regulatory agencies. i currently serve as the ranking member on the senate finance committee which has oversight responsibility toward the treasury department. to fulfill those responsibilities, i've been asking questions of treasury

about debt and cash management procedures. and i have repeatedly been stonewalled by the treasury department. i don't know that i've ever seen this happen before. in either republican or democrat administrations. for example, when we have approached the debt limit i've asked questions about how much cash our nation has in the till only to find the treasury won't tell me and they prefer congress rely on estimates from think tanks and wall street firms. furthermore, during the recent debt limit impasses, administration officials were busy frightening seniors, our troops and financial market participants about whether or not they would be paid in the event that the treasury would run out of cash. officials also identified threats of massive financial instability, stemming from a breach of the debt limit and potential disruptions from a downgrade of the rating on u.s. government securities.

so naturally i asked congress -- treasury and, in fact, every voting member of the financial stability oversight council or fsoc to provide congress and the american people information regarding the plans they had in place to respond to such catastrophes. mr. president, out of close to 20 letters that i sent to fsoc members, i received only two responses. apparently the fsoc which was empowered by the so-called dodd-frank act to r07bd to emerging threats to financial stability does not identify or share response plans with respect to any threat that could emerge as a result of government policies. that being the case, i believe that we should strip fsoc of any notional oversight of financial stability and call it what it really is, another unrestrained executive agency created only to

neactd -- enact additional regulations. we have found fownd that some regulators had plans for how to response to a ratings downgrade yet none of these plans were shared with congress. put simply, if we're going to empower a material regulatory body like the fsoc to respond threats to financial stability that body should be required to share those plans with the american people. sadly, thus far that hasn't been eut case. another thing -- been the case. another thing i've learned is we need to take a closer look at treasury department's use of so-called extraordinary measures which have become all too ordinary. these, quote, extraordinary measures, unquote, are merely ways for the treasury department to temporarily delay facing a debt limit increase by issuing shadow debt. for example, treasury can simply

declare a debt issuance suspension period and stop issuing debt it normally would issue while instead effectively telling the lender, don't worry, i'll pay you back later with interest. i believe that authority to use these types of extraordinary measures needs to be reexamined. as you can see, mr. president, there are a number of problems that need to be confronted with regard to our nation's ever growing debt. like i said, we need to work together to address our nation's unsustainable entitlement programs. otherwise any effort to rein in our deficits and deficits will amount to little more than tinkering around the edges. in addition, we need to improve information sharing between congress and the executive branch on issues regarding or relating to our debt. the treasury department and our financial regulators have a lot to do with maintaining the depth, liquidity and efficiency

of the market for treasury securities. and congress has a duty to exercise oversight over these functions. unfortunately, the administration far more often than not opts to keep congress in the dark on these issues. this has to stop. mr. president, by using his authority to suspend the debt limit through february 7, 2014, president obama has opted not to confront any of these serious issues. instead he's leading us even farther down a path that we already know is unsustainable. that being the case i plan to vote in favor of the resolution of disapproval and i urge my colleagues to do the same. having said all this, we're in a really big mess on obamacare. or if you want to call it -- quote -- "the affordable care act" nobody believes it's affordable at all. they know it's going to lead us

right into even more bankruptcy than we have right now. i suspect that over time our brilliant people in the i.t. world, information technology world, many of whom i know personally, will find some way to resolve what really has been a horrible, horrible situation. we all know it's horrible. and i hope they can. i hope they can resolve that. i think it's going to be hard because it's such a mess, and it's been done by at least four major groups and dozens of others. i hope mr. zeinst is successful in his efforts to try and cure that, but that doesn't cure the problems with obamacare.

a lot of people, a lot of businesses, especially small businesses in our society today, are making sure their employees don't work more than 30 hours, because if they do, it triggers their having to pay what appear to many to be outrageous health care costs. that's just one thing, and that's not going to be easily solved because the bill is such a stupid bill. it was stupid to begin with. we knew it wouldn't work to begin with. we made that case that it wouldn't work. and, frankly, we're here in this really, really ridiculous posture where we've been stymied because of -- i don't want to call it illiteracy in the i.t. world, but certainly there are are -- is some incompetency here. i hope they can resolve that.

but that still doesn't resolve the 30-hour rule which is a very important thing. or how about 50-employee rule? a lot of businesses that would have expanded, small businesses that would have grown, that would have tested the market and really gotten involved, they don't want to employ more than 49 people and trigger a massive, massive, sudden cost to their businesses. these are problems that basically are unsolvable under the bill. and they may be even larger problems than what we have with regard to the problems that i've been mentioning. that's just the beginning. i could speak hours about what's wrong with this lousy bill. i just wish some of my colleagues on the other side would start saying what they

actually know. they know that it's a lousy bill. they know that it's something that is not going to work. and if it does, if they continue to maintain that it has to work, it's going to be a massive cost to society with less effective health care than we've ever had before. it isn't just these technical problems that we have to solve, but problems that don't make sense. and i know what's going to happen. within the next year or two our friends on the other side, or should i say the white house in particular, president obama is going to throw his hands in the air and say it's not working, we've got to go to a single-payer system, meaning socialized medicine. anybody who believes that's the way to go, it sounds easy, but

anybody who believes that is the way to go hasn't looked at socialized medicine around the world, which they can point to some instances where it's worked for a short time. but over time it results in less health care, higher costs, and stallification of what could be a great health care system. i want to solve these problems on health care but i think they ought to be solved on a bipartisan basis and not just a partisan basis, which is where we are with regard to obamacare, or should i say -- quote -- "the affordable care act." there are a number of people in this body and the other body who, like me, have worked in health care areas, on health care issues ever since we've been in the congress. we'd be willing to sit down and get this resolved. i have to say there was no real consultation, no real effort to work in a bipartisan way as far

as i could see, even at the lower levels in congress. it was just they're going to pass this and that's the way it is. and now they're stuck with it. and should i say they're not really the ones who are stuck with it. it's the american people and the american taxpayers who are stuck with it. we've got to sooner or later get together and resolve this problem without going to socialized medicine. i've talked to a number of doctors, health care providers who are going to get out of the profession. they don't want to be governed by this type of governance. and, frankly, you're going to find if we go to socialized medicine, doctors aren't going to work more than six or eight hours a day where today they'll work as long as it takes to serve people who need their help. you're going to find a real dearth of doctors. we're going to find a real death of ability to -- a real dearth

of ability to find the health care people need and doing what that board is set up for, and that is rationing. and once that starts, the american people are going to rebel, and it's going to happen sooner or later if we don't get our friends on the other side to at least work with us on finding some resolution. i have to say we're working on our side to come up with a resolution, and i hope i can interest our colleagues on the other side. i admit that we can do a lot better than we're doing around here. we can do it in a much better bipartisan way than we're doing it. i think some people get a joy out of just creating battles around here when we should get a joy out of resolving problems. mr. president, i suggest the absence -- mr. president, i yield to the distinguished senator from south dakota.

mr. thune: thank you, mr. president. i thank my colleague from utah and appreciate his very eloquent remarks. he's been a great leader on health care issues for a lot of years around here and a fierce opponent of obamacare when it passed and late out very compelling arguments at the time about why we shouldn't adopt this law. unfortunately for the people of this country, many of the predictions that he made are coming out to be true. but i appreciate the leadership that he provides for us as a member of the finance committee and his continued advocacy for policies that are good for consumers in this country when it comes to the issue of health care. mr. president, this friday marks a full month since healthcare.gov went wide. this is the web site that in conjunction with the new health care law, was promised as a solution to all the problems in the delivery and costs of health care in this country. and to be frank, mr. president, i don't think anybody would deny this fact on either side of the political aisle. these past 29 days have been

nothing short of a disaster. the administration won't disclose how many americans were actually able to enroll in plans. they aren't forthcoming when it comes to disclosing exactly what the problem is with the web site other than calling the problems -- quote -- "glitches." well, mr. president, glitches refer to temporary problems that are easily remedied. mr. president, the problems with the health care law cannot merely be called glitches. the problems go deeper than technical problems on a web site which, by the way, cost $400 million to develop. as the president said last week, obamacare is not just a web site. it's much more. well, mr. president, that's true, it is much more. it is a fundamentally flawed piece of legislation that is resulting in real-life consequences for middle-class americans. my colleagues and i, the senator from utah and others, have been speaking about the broken promises of this legislation

since it came to the floor of the senate almost four years ago. we know that this law will not work as promised. and, unfortunately, thousands of americans are realizing it too as they face higher costs and canceled insurance plans. many americans are experiencing sticker shock when it comes though their health care costs. middle-class americans already struggling to make ends meet are now facing steep premium increases in the obamacare exchanges. last month, avec roy of forbes reported on a study that says -- and i quote -- "obamacare will increase insurance rates for younger men by an average of 97% to 99% and for younger women an average of 55% to 62%." in my home state of south dakota, that's more than just a statistic. that is a grim reality facing thousands of young men and women. by comparing a typical low-cost plan for a healthy 30-year-old person in my state of south dakota, this year with a bronze plan that they would be able to

get in south dakota's health care exchange next year, the premium increases are nothing short of staggering. younger women are going to face a 223% premium increase, and younger men are going to face a 393% premium increase when you compare data from the h.h.s. with data from g.a.o. about premiums in south dakota in january of this year. that's more, mr. president, than a $1,500 annual increase for women and a $2,000 increase in health care premiums each year for 30-year-old men in my state of south dakota. but it's not just south dakota. it's not confined to south dakota alone, and people of my state are not alone in their experience of sticker shock. look at what's happening in the state of nebraska where premium increases are 143. or in georgia, where premium increases are 198%. money that could be used to pay off student loans, save for a

home or start a family is now going to be used to pay for obamacare. according to a new analysis by avalier health americans could face steep cost-sharing requirements like co-payments, coinsurance and deductibles layered on top of their month little premiums. it's -- monthly premiums. it is clear health care costs are going up, not down, particularly for younger americans. additionally, president obama promised health care premiums would go down by an average of $2,500 per family. if you look at what family premiums have done, they've actually jumped by more than $2,500 since obamacare became law. while costs continue to increase, despite the president's promise to the contrary, household income has fallen by over $3,700 since president obama first took office. mr. president, no i.t. specialist can fix the problem of increased health care costs due to obamacare. the only fix is to repeal this

law and to start over. in addition to higher costs, families are discovering other grim news. for example, they can't keep the plan that they like, despite the fact that the president promised that they will be able to. over and over and over again the promise told -- the president told americans that they would be able to keep the insurance that they have. well, millions are now facing health insurance cancellation notices due to obamacare and that number is expected to increase up to nearly 10 million by the end of this year. in fact, just this morning, cbs news published a story with the headline and the headline read, "more than 2 million people getting booted from existing health insurance plans." these are americans who had coverage they liked and now cannot continue to purchase. finally, after dozens of media reports of americans who losing plans their like, the white house spokesman said, it is true that some americans will not be

able to keep the health care plan that they like under obamacare. well, that's -- you don't have to tell people in this country as deborah from west chester, california, said in an article last week in the "los angeles times" -- and i quote -- "all we've been hearing the last three years is, if you like your policy, you can keep it. i'm infuriated because i was lied to." carefirst, blue cross/blue shield is being forced to cancel plans that cover 76,000 individuals in virginia, maryland, and washington, d.c., due to changes made by president obama's health care law. that represents more than 40% -- more than 40% of the 177,000 individuals covered by carefirst in those states. president obama said on july 21 of 2009, if you like your current plan, you will be able to keep it. let me repeat that, he said, "if

you like your plan, you will be able to keep it." end quote. that's from 2009. but he also went on to say, "i won't sign a bill that somehow would make it tougher for people to keep their health insurance." and that's from another conference -- conference he had with bloggers back in 2009. mr. president, it is abundantly clear that this is not a simple misstatement or a glitch in the law. it is another broken promise that reveals serious underlying problems with the core principles of this law. no i.t. specialist can fix the problem of canceled plans due to obamacare. the only fix is to repeal this law and to start over. the president promised that people could keep a health care plan that they liked, but an nbc news article published yesterday shows that the administration knew as early as 2010 that this wasn't going to be the case. nbc is reporting that 50% to 0%

of the 14 million consumers who buy their insurance individually, in the individual marketplace, can expect to receive a cancellation letter or the equivalent over the next year because their existing policies don't meet the standards mandated by the new health care law. one expert predicts that number could reach as high as 80%. and i'll say that many of those forced to buy pricier new policies will experience -- quote -- "sticker shock of the" you don't have to look any further than george schwabb, a 62-year-old man from north carolina who said he was perfectly happy with the plan from bleus cross/blue shield, the plan he currently had, which also insured his wife for a $228 monthly premium. but this past september, he was surprised to receive a letter saying his policy was no longer available. the comparable plan the

insurance company offered him carried a $1,208 monthly premium asand a $5,500 deductible. and the closest example found on the exchanges had a 940% jump in premiums to $948. the deductible is less, he said, but the plan doesn't meet my needs. it's unaffordability. i'm sitting here thinking -- it's unaffordable. i'm sitting here thinking we shall just pay the fine and just paying when we get sick. everybody is worried about whether the web site is fixable, he said. but that's fixable. this stuff isn't fixable. and that's from mr. schwabb from north carolina and that's just one of many stories out there about how this law is affecting average americans. so much so that now even democrats have come out criticizing parts of the health care law. most recently, there were 10

senate democrats asked the administration to delay the responsibility to sign up for health care before the individual mandate tax kicks in. i agree that americans should not pay a fine but delaying implementation does not solve the underlying problem that this bill is simply bad policy. it was a partisan bill that was rushed through without adequate forethought on the implementation problems and the serious adverse effects it would have on americans' daily lives. giving people more time to try and navigate a broken web site with glitches is not going to fix this underlying fundamental flaw in this law. mr. president, a majority of americans, 56%, believe that the web site glitches are part of a broader problem with the health care law. obamacare is more than a web site. it's real-life consequences that squarely hit middle-class americans. americans are facing sticker shock and discovering that they

are being dropped from an insurance plan that they like. as one woman said, "i was all for obamacare until i found out i was paying for it." that, too, was a story in the "l.a. times" that ran over the weekend. mr. president, obamacare is not ready for primetime. we've got a -- the president's got a new healt healthcare.gov r who's coming in and trying to fix the web site by the end of november, jeffrey czar. but a fix to the web site by the end of november doesn't rectify the underlying problems with this law. the problems with this law are more -- are more than just problems with the web site. we need to continue to work to repeal the onerous parts of this law and to replace it with solutions that actually lower the cost of health care and give americans continued access to a doctor they choose, at a cost that they can afford. mr. president, republicans here at the time when this law was

being debated and passed in the senate several years ago and subsequent to that time have consistently put forward solutions, solutions to the health care challenges that we face in this country that don't entail having the government take over literally one-sixth of the american economy. and as we can see from the roll-out of this, the government doesn't do complicated things very well. this is a disaster at the roll-out but it is a train wreck in terms of substance and what it's going to do and the harm that it will cause to middle-class americans. there are so many better solutions, mr. president. we should allow people to buy insurance across state lines, create interstate competition, allow market forces to drive insurance costs down, allow people and businesses to join groups so they can get the benefit of group purchasing power. do away with the -- the issue of defensive medicine by getting rid of a lot of the junk lawsuits that are clogging up our legal system in this country. allowing people to have a tax credit where they can buy their own insurance and use their

judgment and allow for transparency when it comes to pricing and outcomes so that the market and the competition that exists out there works in a way that makes insurance rates come down for everybody and improves the quality of health care in this country. there are so many good ideas out there, mr. president, that don't involve a government takeover of health care. and the results now that that has that we've seen that that has caused. and so i hope that not only will the american people who i think are quickly coming to the conclusion that this is a bad law, it is a flawed policy to start with, but members of congress here in washington, d.c., members of the united states senate will also come to that conclusion and we'll decide that it is time to not only delay this but to repeal it and start over. we need a do-over. the american people need a do-over. we need to -- an opportunity, mr. president, to put policies in place that actually will put

downward pressure on insurance rates in this country rather than increasing them, which is what we've seen with obamacare, dramatic increases for many people across this country, loss of coverage that people liked. they were told by the president repeatedly over and over and over and over again, the president went out there and said, if you like the insurance you have, you can keep it. well, we now know, mr. president, that's not true. and we know that the administration knew that wasn't true. and so it is time that we acknowledge we need a do-over. the american people need a do-over. we need health care policies in this country that drive down costs for people, for families, middle-class americans, that improve the quality of health care delivery in this country, and that don't create costly harm to the economy. we hear over and over and over again that the mandates and the requirements and the costs associated with obamacare are

making it more difficult and more expensive to create jobs in this country and we're seeing an economic growth rate that is sluggish in the 1% to 2% range. we're seeing the lowest labor participation rate literally in the last 35 years, since jimmy carter was president of the united states. chronically high unemployment. lower take-home pay. an economy, mr. president, that is suffering from too much cost and too many policies that actual make it more difficult -- actually make it more difficult, more expensive to create jobs. we need to be looking at health care policies that improve coverage, lower costs, and make it less difficult and less costly to create jobs in this economy. so we can get americans back to work, we get our economy growing and expanding at a more robust rate and improving the standard of living and quality of life for people all across this country. this policy, the obamacare health care policy, was ill-fated, was misguided from

the beginning, and now we're seeing the effects and the results of that. and hopefully here politicians in washington, d.c., on both sides of the aisle will come to the correct conclusion and that is that it's time to start over and do this the right way. mr. president, i yield the floor. mr. hatch: mr. president, i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. carper: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from delaware. mr. carper: mr. president, i ask that the roll call -- quorum call be vitiated, please. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. carper: thank you, mr. president. as many of us will recall, on october 29, 2012, super storm sandy made landfall in my part of the united states. its impact up and down the east coast were devastating and heartbreaking. new york, new jersey, parts of new england were hit particularly hard. in delaware, we did not

experience the level of devastation that was inflicted on our neighbors to the north and to the east, but our state did receive significant damage. in total, there were over 200 detectives attributed to superstorm sandy. today we remem remember the lives lost and those forever impacted by this storm. as i travel through delaware during and after the storm i saw some of the massive impacts of that storm firsthand. but i saw something else as well. i saw people from all walks of life pulling together, helping one another and taking care of their neighbors. the impacts of that superstorm are still fresh in my mind today as we continue to rebuild. in delaware, new jersey, in new york, and other places up the east coast. but not only are the impacts of

the superstorm still fresh in my mind, something else is as well and that is this: the extraordinary efforts of ordinary people who left the comfort of their own homes in delaware, in maryland, in pennsylvania, new jersey, new york, connecticut, and other states as well, and they left their homes to help people they had never met and were probably never -- would probably never see again. they did it not because they were paid to do it, not because someone told them to do it, but because they wanted to do it. this morning i met a handful of delawarans called to action by the red cross to volunteer in the communities and shelters in delaware, in new jersey, and new york. those volunteers including charlotte and richard duffy, joe miller and glen shally are joining us in the senate chamber and we work them.

in the days and weeks following sandy they stopped their lives to help others and for that we are truly grateful. i thank you all for your extraordinary service. as our rebuilding efforts continued our thankful for the first responders, the good samaritans who pulled together not only in delaware but states to the north to ensure the safety and health of our neighbors. a few minutes ago i told the folks who were gathered in my office for just some light refreshments before we came over here, i said to the 2k3wr507 joining us today in the chamber that last night i'd heard a speech from paul begalla, a key member of president clinton's team during his presidency, on television a million times and widely known for his wit and we saw another side of paul begalla last night. we saw his wit as well. but we also heard from them a recounting and retelling of the story in the old testament of

the first question asked in the bible and he asked the audience, who asked the first question, nobody knew and he said actually the question was asked by abel who had explain his brother cain and the heavenly father knew what had happened, looked up, tracked down abel and said where's cain? and cain said am i my brother's keeper? am i my brother's keeper? that story is retold in the bible in a number of places as the golden rule, to look out -- help out for other people the way we'd like to be helped, treat other people the way we want to be treated. not only does it show up in the old testament and the new testament including the parable of the good samaritan but it shows up in the sacred scripture if you happen to be christian, mox, hin due, vitter --

behind ewe, -- hindu, the obligation to help our neighbors whoever they might be. the parable of the new testament jeez us is asked who is my neighbor and he tells the story of the good samaritan who ultimately was helped not by someone from his community, not by a clergyman who walked by, helped by somebody from another part of that country that didn't care at all for the fellow beaten and left for dead. the financial cost of superstorm sandy were also severe, an estimate -- and estimated to be not just in the hundreds of billions -- hundreds of millions of dollars but the billions of dollars. it will take years to recover from devastation like this. as my colleagues and i know it is important we get that recovery right. i want us to take a look at a few pictures of seaside heights, new jersey before

sandy and after. as i turn to the photographs on my left here i would say to the presiding officer a lot of people who might be watching this across the country on c-span are wondering where is seaside heights, new jersey. i wondered that myself. i'm from delaware. lot of the people have heard from asbury park where bruce springsteen is from. it's a little bit north of asbury park. and 50 miles away is atlantic city a lot of us have heard of. this is a shot taken in may of 2009 in seaside heights, new jersey. this is a before shot. this is about -- roughly three years, a little more than three years before the hurricane. and a couple of buildings here, we have these yellow arrows right here and they're there for a purpose so when we look at the after shot we can figure out what happened to those structures. here's a red arrow on this

building. this is about three and a half years later when sandy came acalling. here we go. these buildings aren't in the same place. they don't look alike, don't look the same. look to have been a pier along through here is gone. there iewflt be roads through here and now irthere are what appear to be sandy trails. and virtually every house here is badly damaged, many of them absolutely totally destroyed. and we have another shot here, same town, seaside heights. this is obviously the beach, the boardwalk, and this is an amusement park. and a lot of people went there over the years, had a great time, families for decades. and they had a roller coaster here, had a lot of rides here. i like rides. my wife says are you ever going to grow up, i say i hope not, because it's still fun to me. but there is a roller coaster

here and we'll take a look, this is taken late may, 2009. there's the roller coaster. let's see what it looks like after hurricane sandy. thank you. there's the roller coaster. here's the roller coaster. it's in the ocean. and here's what's left of the pier and of the amusement park. the power of that storm is i think demonstrated graphically by these photos which as i said earlier that storm which took the lives not just destroyed this amusement park, not just the beaches, the homes of this one town but wreaked havoc throughout the mid-atlantic and northeastern seaboard and took the lives of over 200 people. in the aftermath of hurricane creant we saw many -- katrina we saw many problems in the recovery phase that held communities back and created great suffering. and not only great suffering, a

lot of anger in terms of the inadequate response, the untimely response, the inept response, but money was not always well spent, the efforts were not well coordinated, the recovery most slowly -- moched slowly as a result. thanks in part to the post-katrina emergency management reform act of 2006 which was shepherded through our committee by senators susan collins and joe lieberman, many of the problems that we saw during katrina's recovery efforts have been fixed and we've seen a great deal of improvement in our emergency response efforts as a result. i'd like to say i have a friend of mine who you ask him, who are you dock doing, he always says compared to what? when you say how are we doing with respect to the recovery effort after summer storm sandy, compared to what? compared to katrina, we're

doing great. can we do better? you bet we can, but we've learned a lot and seven years later you can tell we have learned not only all of our lessons but certainly a number of them. but that act that was passed about a year ago required fema to bolster -- about a half dozen years ago, that required fema to bolster regional offices to build strong relationships with state, local and tribal governments. as an old recovering governor, lieutenant governor prescwhrieding here we know the federal government can't do everything and particularly in responding to emergencies with the local folks, some cases tribal units, with the emergency responders, the national guard, all of the above, is critical. but that, those strong relationships have not only improved the ability of the federal government to respond to disasters, they've also enhanced fema's capability to

support state, local, and tribal governments as they rebuild. that law also required fema to coordinate with other federal departments to write a national disaster recovery strategy. this eventually led to the natural disaster recovery framework which has helped organize and coordinate recovery efforts to hurricane sandy. the key question we need to ask after a storm like this is whether it was an aberration or a harbinger of things to come. i'd like to think it was an aberration. there's a good chance it was not. just a few short years ago hurricanes hitting the northeastern half of the east coast were relatively uncommon. hurricane sandy is actually the third major hurricane to threaten or strike the northeastern coast of our country in the last three years. unfortunately, we're almost through this hurricane season, knock on wood without a major

sterm hitting our coast. unfortunately, the northeast, mid-atlantic and other vulnerable areas are expected to see more frequent and larger storms like sandy in the future. earlier this year the government accountability office known as g.a.o. added a new area to its high risk list. the impact of climate change on the federal government and on our country. g.a.o. explained that among other things climate change -- this is a quote -- could threaten coastal areas with rising sea levels, alter agricultural productivity, and increase the intensity and frequency of severe weather events, close quote. g.a.o. also argued that the government is not prepared to deal with climate change, state and local governments, are not prepared to deal with the impacts of climate change and recommended we take a stratd jik look and start to appear

accordingly. mr. president, the costs associated with responding to and recovering from a hurricane like sandy both the human and financial costs, are so severe that we simply cannot afford to face this devastation over and over and over again. i think it might have benign stein who defined the -- been ienstein who said, we can't do the same thing over and over again. it's a different world in which we live and we have to respond to those changes. fortunately we've seen some states take promising steps toward addressing some of the issues that g.a.o. has identified. in particular the states of new york and new jersey have begun to plan to mitigate against future disasters. we know all too well an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. in fact, a few years ago, the national institute of building

sciences issued a report that concluded that for every dollar that we spend on various mitigation measures, we can save $4 in response and recover costs. for a $1 investment, we end up saving $4. for mitigation we can save money and most importantly, save lives. we must ensure that sound policies are incorporated into this recovery effort. this this is especially import as climate change drives the chevrolet and increases the severity and frequency of coastal storms. by working together we can rebuild and blk stronger by better protecting ourselves from future storms. but in doing see we can't ignore what i believe and what many experts believe that may be the underlying cause of storms like hurricane sandy. it's not enough to just address the symptom, that is the storm, the wind, the sea level

rise, the surge, we need to address the underlying cause or causes. as we recover from sandy and put into place the protections we need to reduce the impact of the next big one, we would make a mistake if we didn't think about what we need to do to address not just the symptoms of climate change but the underlying cause and causes itself. mr. president, i've been joined on the floor by my colleague senator menendez from new jersey and senator, my colleague, i should say this through the presiding officer, but we're -- we have some folks fowlkes here today from delaware who ended up as i said earlier, in new jersey, and i think in new york, our state was hit, nothing like your state but our folks in the spirit of the good samaritan with the encouragement and the organizational skills of the red cross came to your state across that delaware river and in order to lend a manned hand

to people they didn't know, never met, will probably never see again and someday the tables will be turned. someday it will be our state so it will be delmarva that's reeling from the impact of a storm like that and we know that when that happens you'l there for us as well. with that, mr. president, i'm pleased to yield the floor to my friend from new jersey. thanks so much. the presiding officer: the senator from new jersey. mr. menendez: mr. president, let me start off by thanking my

distinguished colleague, the senior senator from delaware, for his remarks and for the people of delaware who came to new jersey to help us. that is the essence of why we call this great country the united states of america. and in moments of challenge and adversity, we come together and we appreciate the delawareans who came to help us. and of course we hope we never have to repay the kindness, but if perchance it comes, we will be there. thank you, senator carper. mr. president, i come to the floor on this anniversary of superstorm sandy a year ago. we all remember what has now become an iconic photo. it's hard to believe that it has been one year since sandy but it has, and for a year under difficult and trying circumstances, new jerseyans

have pulled together, worked together and helped each other to recover. i rise today in praise of their tenacity, their resilience, their spirit of community and remembering all of the hard work of the many first responders, federal, state and local officials, and community leaders and volunteers who helped in those recovery efforts. this -- just yesterday i was with secretary donovan in new jersey to announce another $1.4 billion in community development grant disaster relief funding. this is $1.4 billion in flexible use funding that comes in addition to the $1.8 billion we've already received from the hard-fought $60 million disaster relief package we passed a year ago. we secured that funding after a long debate over whether or not we as a nation and a congress were prepared to provide disaster relief to the people of my state and others that suffered devastating losses. in standing with me in that effort were many in this chamber and one who is no longer with us, our late colleague and

friend, senator frank lautenberg. he and i worked against many who did not want to provide new jersey the disaster relief we needed. we were in the midst of a debt ceiling debate, fiscal cliff, at the end of a congressional session, and even after sandy relief had passed the senate, with bipartisan support, the house republican leadership chose not to immediately bring the relief package to a vote, unnecessarily delaying our recovery from sandy by six weeks. there were those in the congress who believed that even in times of disaster and crisis, we're on our own. i don't believe that, mr. president. i believe, as i just said to my distinguished colleague, we're all in this together. and in times of crisis, we come together as a community. that's why when the state of new jersey submitted its application last march to use $1.8 billion in federal sandy relief to help thousands of homeowners and small businesses rebuild, the

obama administration, through h.u.d. secretary donovan, approved the application the following month. we've come a long way since october 29, when sandy made landfall in southern new jersey. 159 people lost their lives. 8.5 million customers lost pow power. more than 650,000 homes were damaged. 40,000 in our state were severely damaged or destroyed. here's an example of how far we've come. you can see here the damage that sandy brought on this home one year ago. and as you can see in the second photo, today it is well on its way to being fully restored. but we have a long way yet to go in every community to fully recover from the extent of the damage and to make families and businesses whole again. a year ago, this headline ran in "the record."

"business losses mount." some choosing to close rather than rebuild. hundreds of thousands of businesses were forced to close, causing an estimated $65 billion in economic loss and resulted in emergency declarations for disasters in 13 states up and down the east coast. in a matter of minutes, people had lost lives, they lost their homes, their property, their livelihoods. but they stood strong and began to rebuild. beyond the headlines of this story, we see the jersey spirit that came in through person after person. despite the uphill climb, imagine imagine rebuilt one home at a time, one business at a time, one community at a time, and that's what makes us jersey strong. for ten days, millions along the east coast lived without power, without phones. seniors were stranded on the upper floors of buildings where elevators were out. the loss of power led to fuel

shortages and long gas lines. you can see in this photograph of the path train terminal that brings literally thousands of people interchanging between new york and negligent and hoboken, the extent of damage to our transportation infrastructure. it was a wake-up call to what could happen again in the future and the investment we need to make in our infrastructure to avoid future damage from future storms. the sandy recovery package we passed last year included $13 billion in critical funding i sought to help restore our transit and highway systems from what they looked like, as you can see in this photograph. the port authority was able to repair the path nation hoboken, to harden electrical equipment to prevent future damage. they were able to elevate roads that were washed away by sandy. and at the end of the day, the legislation included necessary policy reforms that helped streamline recovery efforts and

improve fema's public assistance programs, allowing us to rebuild what was in place before the storm and building it stronger and better than before. since then, almost $400 million in fema grants have been approved to help individuals and families recover. that's over $341 million for housing assistance and more than $54 million for additional needs. homeowners, renters and business owners have received over $764 million in s.b.a. disaster loans, $314 million in fema public assistance grants to help local communities and local nonprofits that serve the public and provided relief. national flood insurance program payments to new jersey have amounted to $3.5 billion to help people rebuild and get their lives back on track. in new jersey alone, more than 261,000 people contacted fema for help and information.

over 126,000 homes have been inspected. and while these numbers show the progress that we've made, the reality is that still for thousands of people in new jersey, recovery is an around-the-clock, 24/7 effort. many new jersey families have now been hit with a -- what i call a triple whammy -- having been flooded by sandy and lost in some cases a lifetime of wo work, then facing repair and mitigation costs, and now facing astronomical increases in flood insurance costs built into a flood reform bill that was passed before sandy hit. even as we slowly recover from the worst natural disaster in our state's history, a manmade disaster is looming in the distance, jeopardizing our recovery. the combination of updated flood maps and the phaseout of premium subsidies for the national flood insurance program threatens to

force victims out of their homes and destroy entire communities. many homeowners will be forced to pay premiums that are several times higher than the current rate they pay. those who cannot afford the higher premiums will be forced to either sell or be priced out of their home, probably at a fire sale. this, in turn, will drive property values and local revenues down at the worst possible time. now, i've heard from countless new jerseyans, many who have come to me in tears who are facing this predicament. these are hardworking middle-class families who played by the rules, purchased flood insurance and are now being priced out of their home. in order to stop this manmade disaster from doing even more damage, i'll be leaving the floor in a few minutes and going to introduce bipartisan legislation to take a timeout and assess the impact these premium hikes will have on

homeowners and the flood insurance program as a whole. the homeowners flood insurance affordability act, which we'll be announce not guilty a few minutes -- announcing in a few minutes, will delay big premium increases imposed for most primary residences until fema completes an affordability study that i had offered under the legislation and proposes a regulatory framework to address the issues found in the study. this will give current homeowners some breathing room before their flood insurance premiums go up. for prospective home buyers, the certainty that they will not see their rate dramatically increase simply because they purchase a home is critically important to maintaining property values. so at the end of the day, we look back at the year since the storm struck and remember those who lost their lives and those who came together to help their neighbors rebuild. we remember the efforts of first responders and government and

community leaders pulling together. it's often said that the hardest steel must go through the hottest fire. and sandy tested what we were made of. when we look at this photograph of twisted metal that once was a roller coaster, we associate it with the destruction of sandy. but we also associate it with how far we've come and what we've learned. we've learned that it's not enough to live in a community, we have to be a part of it. we have to remember that citizenship comes with responsibility not just to ourselves but to each other. in the face of sandy and the aftermath, the tragedy and the loss, we pull together as a community. we work together, help each other rebuild lives and businesses and homes, our beaches and boardwalks, and in doing so we strengthen new jersey's sense of pride and a belief that we are, in fact, in this all together. it is that spirit, that unity that has made negligent stronger

and better than before. let me conclude, mr. president, by saying that recovery from any disaster depends on our continuing cooperation within our communities, at every level of government. the business of government is people, their lives, their homes, their dreams of a better life for themselves and their families. in new jersey, we proved that at every level of government, with various agencies working together, we all came together. there can be no tolerance of partisan division when it comes to the future of my state or any state's efforts to help families rebuild from a disaster like sandy. the storm was extraordinary, but what makes me extraordinarily proud is that new jerseyans rose to the challenge as they always do. there is much work left to do. we've learned that recovery from a disaster is not a one-size-fits-all endeavor. full recovery from sandy will take more than a village. but at the end of the day, the biggest reason new jersey has

made the progress it has and why our state will come back better and stronger than before is because of the people who live there. it hasn't been easy but i can never have been more proud to represent the people of new jersey than i have during this last year since sandy struck. i've seen the best of who we are and what we can do when we pull together, each of us working for the recovery of all of us. looking back at the last year, i'd say we're all new jersey proud as well as new jersey strong. and before i yield the floor, i appreciate my colleague who has come and replaced the late senator lautenberg during this period, senator chiesa. he has been a great partner during the implementation of sandy recovery as well on a whole host of other issues.

we have stood side-by-side with each other during this period of time on behalf of the people of new jersey. he has an extraordinary career, as the former attorney general of the state, continues to have an extraordinary career in his time here in the senate. and i know that he'll be making some remarks, and i appreciate very much the time we've worked together. and before i yield the floor, i have four unanimous consent requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the majority and minority leaders. i ask unanimous consent that these requests be agreed to and be printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. menendez: and with that, mr. president, i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from new jersey. mr. chiesa: mr. president, nearly five months ago, i had the high honor and unexpected privilege to stand in this historic chamber surrounded by my family and be sworn in as a member of the united states senate. my service as a senator will soon draw to a close so i'd like to take this opportunity to

share with my colleagues just a few thoughts before i leave. i want to begin by thanking gorchlegovernor christie for prg me with this incredible opportunity. our professional relationship and friendship began more than 20 years ago as young lawyers working together in a new jersey law firm. we had our entire careers ahead of us. if someone had suggested to me back then that one day chris christie would be governor, i wouldn't have been surprised. i would, however, have dismissed out of hand any suggestion that i might someday be the new jersey attorney general, let alone a member of the united states senate. to have served here representing the people of new jersey has to rank as the greatest honor of my professional life. i will always be grateful to governor christie for the confidence he has shown in me by appointing me, and i will always be thankful for the wonderful opportunities he has given me time and again to serve in public life. i also want to thank my colleagues in the senate